Appeal No. 2000-2100
Application No. 09/101,371
the art at the time the invention was made to modify the
integrated circuit of the prior art with the
symmetrically arranged bond wires of Masuda to reduce
electromagnetic induction.
Appellants argue inter alia (brief, pages 16 and 17) that “to
state that one of ordinary skill in the art would be motivated to
modify the integrated circuit of the prior art with the wires of
Masuda et al. in order to reduce electromagnetic induction does not
make sense since electromagnetic induction has no effect on direct
current resistance, only on alternating current impedance,” and
that the skilled artisan when confronted with the problem of trying
to achieve reduced on-state DC resistance in either power MOSFETs
or power bipolar transistors would not have turned to Masuda’s
teaching of reducing electromagnetic induction in an oscillator
circuit. Appellants also argue (brief, page 17) that “[a]lthough
Masuda et al. may teach a symmetrical arrangement, no teaching or
suggestion is given that the bond wires 10 themselves are in fact
of symmetrical or the same shape” or that they carry equal current
values. With respect to the examiner’s inherency position,
appellants argue (reply brief, page 3) that Masuda “in no way
teaches or suggests that there is uniform current in bond wires
between . . . an IC and a SAW element arranged near the IC,” and
5
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 Next
Last modified: November 3, 2007